High School Cheerleaders in Trouble for Bible Verse Banners

[SzczerbiakManiac]

Reason number 5,349,381 why I have no intention of ever setting foot in the Bible Belt.

Here's just a snippetfrom the Chattanooga Times Free Press (http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2009/sep/29/cheerleaders-religious-signs-draw-fire/)
Cheerleaders’ religious signs draw fire
Tuesday, Sept. 29, 2009

Community members are rallying around Lakeview-Fort Oglethorpe High School cheerleaders after they were banned from displaying signs with Bible verses urging fans and players to "commit to the Lord" and "take courage and do it."

http://media.timesfreepress.com/img/photos/2009/09/28/0929_WEB_NGA1_LFO_signs2_t305.jpg?ba7ba0dd8d7f1e46 4d5eb01fb9ba8c10bd9c61fe

The banners—the paper ones that football players crash through at the beginning of games—have been common sights in the school’s football stadium since 2003, local officials say.

"The cheerleaders are not trying to push a religious cause, to shove religion down someone’s throat," said local youth minister Brad Scott, who was LFO High’s class president in 2004. "The cheerleaders are just using Scripture to show motivation and inspiration to the players and the fans."Not trying to push religion down our throats!?!?! :eek: :eek: :eek:

[BarTopDancer]

Can't get worked up about this. We did questionable stuff in high school too.

It's not like it said "Accept Jesus or you will burn in Hell".

[SacTown Chronic]

You little maggots need Jesus to fire you up? Bullsh*t! You get your asses out there and you win for it me. Got it? You win for me, and your family, and your country, you little nut-huggers. Jesus don't live here anymore, pansies. Now get out there and stomp those Lakeview Country Day faggots a new asshole! Who's with me? Damn right, all of you little mommy-fvckers are or I swear I will molest your family pet this weekend! Now huddle up. "Destroy" on the count of three. One. Two. Three.

DESTROY!!!

[SzczerbiakManiac]

I'm not familiar with the source.

[SacTown Chronic]

That's me if I coached those bible-huggers.


Well that's not actually my coaching style, but it's fun to pretend. Also, I'm not a pet molester.

[flippyshark]

Slightly off topic - Has anyone ever noticed that every time the topic of religious proselytizing comes up, the phrase "shove it down my throat" or a close variation, is ALWAYS employed? As an atheist, I am no fan of evangelizing, but as a person who dislikes overused language memes, I'd love it if media, and the population as a whole, would let this tired phrase go. (I've been complaining about this one for a long time.)

Back on-topic - There's a lot of this kind of thing going on - particularly in smaller, more homogenous communities, where people tend to assume that pretty much everyone else is a believer, so if the tiny minority of atheists or pagans have a problem with such public sentiments, that's their problem, and why should it impede on the good will and godliness of the majority? This is one tough attitude to change. All the same, it is jaw-dropping that a pubic school official would fail to see that such signs are very actively pushing a religious agenda.

[Strangler Lewis]

Put all the Jesus on there you want. The dominant image is still a bunch of football players bursting through a thin barrier held by cheerleaders.

[innerSpaceman]

And now I've got another image in mind ... one which, only perhaps, was not intended by the actual display of dominance and thin cheerleader membrane barrier bursting at the school game.

[flippyshark]

<snicker> Oh, I don't think there's any "perhaps not" about it.

[Moonliner]

While I don't see this particular case as all that earth shaking or even interesting, I am interested in your comments:


particularly in smaller, more homogenous communities, where people tend to assume that pretty much everyone else is a believer, so if the tiny minority of atheists or pagans have a problem with such public sentiments, that's their problem


The majority should rule? Is that really what you are saying? Because I can see a wide range of minority issues that would not do so well under majority rule. At what percentage do the views of the many outweigh the rule of law? 50? 60? 80? 99?

[Alex]

As someone who struggles to accept his own atheism, so long as those signs are being done completely at the hands of the students and they don't harrass anybody who don't wish to participate, I don't care a whole lot.

Though this particular use seems to suggest that calls them in Christ for the purpose of winning football games. If they wish to designate their god as surprisingly petty then who am I to argue.

[SacTown Chronic]

That does seem to be a rather loose interpretation of Phillippians 3:14.

[Moonliner]

As someone who struggles to accept his own atheism, so long as those signs are being done completely at the hands of the students and they don't harrass anybody who don't wish to participate, I don't care a whole lot.

Though this particular use seems to suggest that calls them in Christ for the purpose of winning football games. If they wish to designate their god as surprisingly petty then who am I to argue.

I think I could go for a God of the petty. Help me make that next traffic light, let the toast land butter side up, let my team win a few games.... Yeah. I'd pledge my ever lasting soul to a God like that.

[BarTopDancer]

I think I could go for a God of the petty. Help me make that next traffic light, let the toast land butter side up, let my team win a few games.... Yeah. I'd pledge my ever lasting soul to a God like that.

It's like all the athletes and whoever who thank god after they score/win.

[Jazzman]

Okay, so maybe not the most socially conscious choice of the cheergirls, but it's not like it was the school that plastered the phrases across the side of the gym and forced students to memorize them. The girls did it on their own, and last I checked, that is their Constitutional right. If the phrase fits and is inspiring, then why not use it, regardless of the source? If the Qur'an said somewhere to "Rush, rush, rush my brothers, for the End Zone is sacred and the ultimate praise is to score!" then that'd be a good one too, even for non-Muslims. (I'd quote a real Qur'an verse, but I don't know any.)

Ultimately, I guess I have to wonder why stuff like this freaks people out so much. It's just some phrases on butcher paper, not a forced re-education camp.

[flippyshark]

While I don't see this particular case as all that earth shaking or even interesting, I am interested in your comments:



The majority should rule? Is that really what you are saying? Because I can see a wide range of minority issues that would not do so well under majority rule. At what percentage do the views of the many outweigh the rule of law? 50? 60? 80? 99?

Wow, you really need to re-read my posting. I was pointing out that such communities see their Christian majority as a justification for ignoring church/state separation - hence they don't see any problem with religious banners at public school events. I wasn't giving my own view. My stated atheism should be a clue that I am quite in sympathy with the rights of minorities. There is often good reason to abhor the tyranny of a majority.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Ultimately, I guess I have to wonder why stuff like this freaks people out so much. It's just some phrases on butcher paper, not a forced re-education camp.In a climate where there is a well organized, well funded, and distressingly successful by some measure effort to force mythology to be taught as a valid scientific theory, and scientific theory to be denigrated as "just a guess" no more valid than the magic in a 6000 year old book, you can forgive people for being sensitive about such things.

[flippyshark]

I guess this is as good a place as any to let everyone know that today is Blasphemy Day (http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=50200339561). So, allow me to let loose with my own caustic blasphemy:

The Holy Ghost wears smelly socks.

There. That was purging.

[Gemini Cricket]

Some Christians will use the following to justify their anti-gay rights stances:

"They're cramming their lifestyle down our throats."
"They're so in your face with their parades and rainbow flags."
"They're trying to recruit children to their ways."

I mean, the same thing could be said about Christians.

In my opinion, these cheerleaders parading around a huge poster with a quote from a religious book at a sporting event, to me, is cramming a lifestyle down people's throats in front of other children.

[flippyshark]

I think my throat-cramming remark was misunderstood. It was strictly a comment about language usage. I'm only saying the throat-cramming comparison is extremely overused. It strikes me as a cliche in need of refreshing. (And you are right, I have heard the faithful say it in response to contact with gay-ness) Any time I hear it, though, I tend to assume that the person saying it isn't thinking things through very carefully - just giving a knee-jerk response. I'm all for more thought-out and incisive come-backs.

And to repeat - I'm a major church/state separation proponent.

[innerSpaceman]

Well, it's just that "cramming it down your throat" is so appropriate for the gay theme.

[flippyshark]

*snort-snicker*

[Ghoulish Delight]

Catholic High School Girls in Trouble (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3930000348900501724#) most definitely NSFW!!!



(I copied the link, did not actually load the video, seeing as I am at work, so I'm not positive it's a valid link)

[alphabassettgrrl]

Ultimately, I guess I have to wonder why stuff like this freaks people out so much. It's just some phrases on butcher paper, not a forced re-education camp.

It works to ostracize those who aren't "in." If I don't believe in the god of the banner, what do I get to do while they're standing there with it and everybody else is cheering it? I get to sit essentially by myself and it is clear that I am on the outside.

I find it generally objectionable to put a sectarian happening into what is ostensibly a public (and unrelated) event. If I go to a football game, I don't want it to feel like a religious event. I want sports, not a revival.

[flippyshark]

Link works fine - Oh my, I saw that movie when I was MUCH too young for it. What a nostalgia kick.

[BarTopDancer]

It works to ostracize those who aren't "in." If I don't believe in the god of the banner, what do I get to do while they're standing there with it and everybody else is cheering it? I get to sit essentially by myself and it is clear that I am on the outside.

What happened to cheering for the team? Who would know who is cheering for Jesus, who is cheering for the team and who is cheering in hopes that someone loses their top?

I'd be more inclined to have some sort of "outrage" if someone directly involved (cheerleader, player or student) had an issue. Like HR told us in a training "you can't be offended on someone's behalf. If it bothers you then you are offended. But you can't report it because the person directly involved might or might not be". I am so sick of faux outrage on behalf of people who don't know they should be offended.

If I go to a football game, I don't want it to feel like a religious event. I want sports, not a revival.

Then you should stay away from any sporting even that plays God Bless America (aka Ducks games when the Stars are in town), any sporting event where the player thanks god (football games) and audience members have bible verses painted on their chests. Oh and awards ceremonies where the recipient thanks god.

[alphabassettgrrl]

I'm not offended on anybody else's part. I don't like it. If this were my high school, I probably would either not go to the games, or show up late to avoid it. It would depend if this was the only Jesus time, or if it went on through the game.

Am I frothing about it? No. But I do find it uncomfortable, and would likely take steps to avoid the situation.

[innerSpaceman]

If I go to a football game, I don't want it to feel like a religious event. I want sports, not a revival.

Then what about singing The Star Spangled Banner? It's done at just about every professional sporting event. You either join in, or you're sitting there silent while everyone else is standing up singing. Is this cramming Patriotism down your throat?

I have it on good authority that Uncle Sam is better hung than Jesus, so isn't patriotism at least as objectionable as christianity in this context?

[BarTopDancer]

Then what about singing The Star Spangled Banner? It's done at just about every professional sporting event. You either join in, or you're sitting there silent while everyone else is standing up singing. Is this cramming Patriotism down your throat?

I have it on good authority that Uncle Sam is better hung than Jesus, so isn't patriotism at least as objectionable as christianity in this context?

Those damn Canadian hockey teams and the singing of the Canadian national anthem. We're in America dammit! I don't want that damn Canadian pride shoved down my throat. I feel left out because it's not my country and not my anthem.

[mousepod]

For me, the difference is that "God Bless America" is generic enough to include any god. It's not offensive to this atheist, because it's a love song to the country - asking for divine help is the way the writer/singer chooses to express that love. Calling upon a specific deity carries more baggage for me. If Jesus was invoked at a non-religious event that this Jew was attending, I'd feel uncomfortable.

[lashbear]

It works to ostracize those who aren't "in." If I don't believe in the god of the banner, what do I get to do while they're standing there with it and everybody else is cheering it? I get to sit essentially by myself and it is clear that I am on the outside.

I find it generally objectionable to put a sectarian happening into what is ostensibly a public (and unrelated) event. If I go to a football game, I don't want it to feel like a religious event. I want sports, not a revival.
I agree here - even if you put on a show and cheered, you would still mentally feel outnumbered by the bible-thumpers.

For me, the difference is that "God Bless America" is generic enough to include any god..
I think that the USA should change the song to "Gods Bless America" in order to be inclusive of all religions according to the freedom of religious belief. Lets suggest THAT to the local senators.

[BarTopDancer]

I guess I'm just apathetic enough to be able to separate a bible verse on a piece of butcher paper that is about to be butchered at a high school football game in the bible belt from a religious event. I certainly don't see it as intolerance, hatred or that they are trying to take over the world.

Then again, if this was in TX the football game would be a religious event.

[BarTopDancer]

I agree here - even if you put on a show and cheered, you would still mentally feel outnumbered by the bible-thumpers.

What happened to cheering for the team? Who would know who is cheering for Jesus, who is cheering for the team and who is cheering in hopes that someone loses their top?


I think that the USA should change the song to "Gods Bless America" in order to be inclusive of all religions according to the freedom of religious belief. Lets suggest THAT to the local senators.

We are already WAY over the top in PCness. I can see this happening. MAKE IT STOP!!!!!!!!!!

[Ghoulish Delight]

I guess I'm just apathetic enough to be able to separate a bible verse on a piece of butcher paper that is about to be butchered at a high school football game in the bible belt from a religious event. I certainly don't see it as intolerance, hatred or that they are trying to take over the world.

Then again, if this was in TX the football game would be a religious event.
Intolerance, hatred, whatever have nothing to do with why it's inappropriate. It's a religious overtone to a publicly funded school activity and it shouldn't be there. If we're going to insist on continuing to dump money into an over-hyped system of high school football, siphoning it from actual education, the LEAST that can be asked is that it not involve tacit promotion of religion.

[Alex]

Being outnumbered has nothing to do with whether it is to be allowed.

There aren't many more confirmed atheists than me but it would be an exhausting life if I got bothered every time I'm reminded that I'm the minority.

I've been heckled both for refusing to participate in god stuff and for the fact that I don't say the Pledge of Allegiance or do anything when the national anthem is sung.

All I care about is the state in any way forcing participation or indicating a bias towards religion. I just can't agree that cheerleaders and football players doing this of their own free will (assuming that's true) at entirely optional school related events falls into that category.

[SacTown Chronic]

Less tacit promotion of religion, more cheerleader barrier bursting!

[alphabassettgrrl]

It's a religious overtone to a publicly funded school activity and it shouldn't be there. If we're going to insist on continuing to dump money into an over-hyped system of high school football, siphoning it from actual education, the LEAST that can be asked is that it not involve tacit promotion of religion.

Yeah, that.

I'm not a fan of public performance of "God Bless America." "Star Spangled Banner" is usually sung by only the performer; if people choose to sing along, it's fine, but it's not expected. "Oh, Canada" is the national anthem, and if we're going to sing our anthem, and a Canadian team is playing, it's appropriate to sing theirs, too. I will admit that I'm a little biased on that one, since I find "Oh, Canada" to be a pretty song.

Is it enforced patriotism? I'm not sure. Somehow it feels different. Maybe I just have a knee-jerk reaction against public religion of any stripe.

[Ghoulish Delight]

A sporting event is not government funded.

While I agree with Alex that since the football game is not required, and the sign was likely the idea and creation of the cheerleaders, not school officials, it's low on my scale of offense. But I'm generally incensed at how much of schools' budgets are dumped into football while other core educational necessities are monetarily choked to death, so that reduces the amount of slack I'm willing to give to people privileged to be participating in said public money sink.

[SzczerbiakManiac]

Then again, if this was in TX the football game would be a religious event.Texas... Tennessee... pretty much the same as far as I'm concerned. It's all Bible Belt.

[BarTopDancer]

Texas... Tennessee... pretty much the same as far as I'm concerned. It's all Bible Belt.

Texas takes their high school football playing as serious as they take their beer drinking.

Ok, that's stereotypical.. but Friday Night Lights isn't that far off from how it is in the majority of TX. Life stops for high school football.


GD - I get what you're saying about funding. That irks me too. Probably not to the extent it does you since you're parents are/were teachers (if I recall correctly).

[€uroMeinke]

I'm fine with it as long as they all agree to convert to another religion, or abandon religion altogether should their team lose - since obviously, if they were paying to the right god they should win.

[SacTown Chronic]

- since obviously, if they were paying to the right god they should win.Best typo ever? Best typo ever.

[bewitched]

I look at this as a mother of a child who is inadvertently agnostic/atheist*. Kids have a hard enough time fitting in as it is. I can just picture her sitting there, not agreeing with the majority yet feeling compelled to go along with it because, well, she's a kid. She's a strong kid, but it is still really difficult at an age to stand up against what is popular, right or wrong. Being from Texas (and unfortunately going to a small town school for a short time), I know the pressure put on kids who don't toe the religious (read: Christian) line...even the teachers discriminate.

As an adult, I can clearly see the absurdity in getting upset by this. As an adult, I could care less...but I care about the kids and how the outsiders feel. From this perspective it's wrong. Period.







*By this I mean her dad is a nonpracticing Christian and I am an atheist...she lives with me and has more or less, even though I in no way actively encourage it, adopted my beliefs.

[BarTopDancer]

What happened to cheering for the team? Who would know who is cheering for Jesus, who is cheering for the team and who is cheering in hopes that someone loses their top?

Yet no one has addressed this.

Who would know what you're cheering for? Unless they are chanting Our Father's, then there's an issue.

[Gemini Cricket]

Heather: Oh. My. God. Amber! We totally got busted today for making Jesus signs for the baseball game.

Amber: I know, right?

Heather: I'm so going to Chik-fil-a to protest their bogus decision.

Amber: That's so sick. I'm so there.

Heather: I know, right?

Amber: But don't eat anything there, it's like total fat food.

Heather: Oh, I won't.

Amber: The other day, I heard Carly's legs rub together while she walked by me.

Heather: You didn't!

Amber: I so totally did.

Heather: I forgot to tell you, I almost inhaled a baby carrot during lunch in the cafeteria yesterday.

Amber: I heard. Don't you hate that?

Heather: Totally.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

For the record - I'm not infuriated or horrified by the cheerleader banner, but I do think that it's inappropriate at a public school function, period.

The girls did it on their own, and last I checked, that is their Constitutional right. Students on school grounds at a school-sponsored event do not have the same free speech rights as a student outside of school.

What happened to cheering for the team? Who would know who is cheering for Jesus, who is cheering for the team and who is cheering in hopes that someone loses their top?This is all the more reason to keep Jesus out of the equation. Would be nice if people actually rooted for a team to win the game, instead of rooting for Jesus to help the team to win the game.

Then you should stay away from any sporting even that plays God Bless America...I'm not a fan of that either. I am not placated by the "any God" concept, since there are plenty of people who do not believe in God. Better yet, I'm getting to the point where it seems obvious to me that asking the one all-powerful being to favor their country over others is a rather ugly, divisive, spiteful concept...unless one believes that God can bless everyone simultaneously...and then it's just pointless.

[Jazzman]

Students on school grounds at a school-sponsored event do not have the same free speech rights as a student outside of school.

No, I'm pretty sure that the Constitution applies everywhere. Maybe it's different down in Cali (don't know why it would be) but school policies do not trump the Bill of Rights.

[lashbear]

Maybe they can put up some nifty Westbro Baptist banners calling for the abolition of teen abortion (and warning of the dangers), and maybe some warning to any faggot players on the team that they're going to hell. After all, it IS their right to do that during a school sporting event according to the Bill Of Rights, isn't it ? :rolleyes:

[Jazzman]

Maybe they can put up some nifty Westbro Baptist banners calling for the abolition of teen abortion (and warning of the dangers), and maybe some warning to any faggot players on the team that they're going to hell. After all, it IS their right to do that during a school sporting event according to the Bill Of Rights, isn't it ? :rolleyes:

Well, first, those examples are hardly comparable to the butcher paper pep sign, but technically, yes, those would be within their rights. That's the great, and often messy, thing about freedom and our Constitution; everyone's voice gets to be heard, even if they're a bigoted douchebag. Why do you think Westboro keeps popping up and being such hate-mongers? Because they have a right to, regardless of how asinine their message is or where they present it. Noam Chomsky made a great comment, "If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all," that, in my mind, applies perfectly here.


And, as someone else mentioned earlier, if everyone were forced to attend and repeat the phrase and pray and pass a tithing basket, then that would be an issue. But writing it on a piece of paper that the team runs through? Please. It's just a quote, that even if you're an atheist has a good message. No different than a quote from the Dalai Lama, or a comic book strip, or Lord of the Rings. Would anyone be offended by being wished, "As-Salamu Alaykum?" It means "Peace be upon you," but since it's associated with Islam, should an atheist be offended by it, or appreciate it for what it is?

Last, to be pragmatic, if this offends you (not you Lash, generic tense of you) then so what? Show me someone who isn't offended by something every single day. I find countless things done in schools to be offensive, much more so than a saying on a piece of butcher paper at a football game, and they don't have any basis in any Judeo-Christian beliefs. They're just things that offend me, and run counter to my beliefs and morals. But do I get outraged and hurt by them? No, because in reality, I have no right to expect the world to fit perfectly into my little box of "How Jeff sees the world" or for me to live in Jeffreytopia where nothing offensive ever happens. And neither does anyone else. Somebody is offended by a Bible phrase, somebody else is offended by an atheist phrase. Somebody is offended by one symbol, somebody is offended by its absence. That's life. Let things get to you, or let people be themselves and move on. Each of us has that choice, especially at a football game.

[Strangler Lewis]

No, I'm pretty sure that the Constitution applies everywhere. Maybe it's different down in Cali (don't know why it would be) but school policies do not trump the Bill of Rights.

More or less. (http://www.firstamendmentschools.org/freedoms/speechfaqs.aspx)

[SzczerbiakManiac]

Would anyone be offended by being wished, "As-Salamu Alaykum?" It means "Peace be upon you," but since it's associated with Islam, should an atheist be offended by it, or appreciate it for what it is?I don't know Arabic, so I will trust your translation. I have zero problem with someone merely wishing me peace in any language. It's when they want God/Allah/Buddha/Flying Spaghetti Monster to create that peace for me that my craw starts to stick.


Well, maybe someone wishing that last deity bless me would make me giggle.

[innerSpaceman]

No, I'm pretty sure that the Constitution applies everywhere. Maybe it's different down in Cali (don't know why it would be) but school policies do not trump the Bill of Rights.
I don't agree with it, but apparently school policies trump student's free-speech rights on a constant basis. What planet have you been living on?

[Ghoulish Delight]

Free speech does not mean "You have the right to say whatever the fvck you want, whenever the fvck you want, without consequence." It means "You have the right to say whatever the fvck you want, whenever the fvck you want, without censure from the government."

I can't run around work screaming at the top of my longs that I hate every single person who works there and expect no repercussions. All I can expect is to not get arrested for it. I can surely be told to shut the fvck up, and I can be fired. That is not a violation of my free speech rights.

Being told "What you are saying is not appropriate for the setting you're in" is not a violation of free speech rights. It's civility.

[Gemini Cricket]

I can't run around work screaming at the top of my longs that I hate every single person who works there and expect no repercussions.

Which makes me wonder why GD hates Long's so much.
:D

Sorry, couldn't resist. That's what 3 hours of sleep does to me.

[Alex]

If the school were a private organization then that would be completely true.

But if the government (in the form of the public school) is going to bar speech based purely on the content of it (which is what is happening if they're told they can't write scripture but can write other things) then they need to have a reason beyond simple civility.

That reason would be that the cheerleaders are somehow acting as representatives of the state and therefore there sign is establishment. I disagree. I suspect that the Supreme Court would agree (that is shouldn't be allowed) though I don't know if this particular level of remove has been ligitaged. They've certainly spoken on what the football coaches can do.

I agree that being all religious about running onto the field is obnoxious. But I think it is a very significant step to go from "politesse suggests you not do this" to "you will not be allowed to do this."

I can't run around work screaming at the top of my longs that I hate every single person who works there and expect no repercussions.

No, but if you are allowed to run around screaming on the street, they can't bar you just because what you scream happens to be religious.

[mousepod]

I went back and read the original article that was linked in the OP.

I guess it is all about Jesus in that town, and majority does indeed rule.

“Families entrust public schools with the education of their children, but condition their trust on the understanding that school activities will not purposely be used to advance religious views that may conflict with their religious beliefs,” the system’s release states. “As a result, the courts prohibit rabbi-led prayers at school sporting events, Wiccan posters in gymnasiums and reading the Quran over the school public announcement system.”

[Betty]

I went back and read the original article that was linked in the OP.

I guess it is all about Jesus in that town, and majority does indeed rule.

So - Christian posters okay - Wiccan (and other) posters not???

How is this okay?

[Alex]

That's not what the school district's statement said. It was explaining that they wouldn't allow Christian messages just like they wouldn't allow other religious messages.

[SacTown Chronic]

I took part in a prayer circle before a basketball game that I was coaching last MLK Day because our hosts were a private Christian school. I participated in the prayer because it does me no harm or inconvenience to do so. And I knew when we scheduled the exhibition game against a Christian school that there would be prayer. It's kinda part of the deal with those schools. Also, our hosts were kind enough to invite anyone who did not want to participate to step outside, no judgements attached. Cool people like that, I'll go along to get along. Why not?

Take the same situation at a public school, and I would have walked my team off the court until the nonsense was over. A very silent, very public protest, if you will.

[mousepod]

That's not what the school district's statement said. It was explaining that they wouldn't allow Christian messages just like they wouldn't allow other religious messages.

You're right, Alex. I misread the context of the quote.

[Alex]

It didn't help that the article had the "no Christian stuff" part of the statement half an article away from the "no non-Christian stuff" part.

[Ghoulish Delight]

If the school were a private organization then that would be completely true.

But if the government (in the form of the public school) is going to bar speech based purely on the content of it (which is what is happening if they're told they can't write scripture but can write other things) then they need to have a reason beyond simple civility.I go back and forth on this point. For example, what about an office of a government agency and its employees? At a private business, a manager definitely has the right to stop an employee from saying, "Jesus is our savior!" every time someone passes their cubical. If that's done at a government office (let's leave the public out of it, I'm talking about a cube-farm of government employees), is that government infringement of speech? Is that employee's manager an agent of the state censoring her? Or is the manager just someone trying to run an efficient operation? Are government offices barred from enforcing the types of workplace rules that are taken for granted within a private workplace, but would not be kosher for a cop to enforce on a public street, simply because it's a pubic institution?

A school is not an office, but it's close. As long as we're not talking about legal consequences, I don't have a problem with them enforcing certain restrictions on speech and behavior with the goal of creating a workable environment. And for the most part, considering that teachers are not routinely arrested on charges of false imprisonment for making students sit in a room for an hour, we all agree on that.

Yes, this is an edge case, and as I said earlier I don't consider it a major offense. But while the cheerleaders aren't being paid by the school and the message wasn't being produced by the school, the context is a football game that is being paid for by the school, and they are wearing uniforms representing their school. So I do think that sticks one little pinky toe over the line of being a representative of the school.

[Strangler Lewis]

I took part in a prayer circle before a basketball game that I was coaching last MLK Day because our hosts were a private Christian school. I participated in the prayer because it does me no harm or inconvenience to do so. And I knew when we scheduled the exhibition game against a Christian school that there would be prayer. It's kinda part of the deal with those schools. Also, our hosts were kind enough to invite anyone who did not want to participate to step outside, no judgements attached. Cool people like that, I'll go along to get along. Why not?

Take the same situation at a public school, and I would have walked my team off the court until the nonsense was over. A very silent, very public protest, if you will.

Making the Jews and atheists stand outside with the smokers doesn't sound all that cool to me. What about respectful silent non-participation?

[Alex]

So I do think that sticks one little pinky toe over the line of being a representative of the school.

I suspect the Supreme Court would agree with you and not me.

[Strangler Lewis]

If the private or the public employer censors disruptive shouts of "Jesus Saves!" but not "Forty F*ckin' Niners!," it can expect to be sued for religious discrimination under state and federal civil rights laws.

[Ghoulish Delight]

If the private or the public employer censors disruptive shouts of "Jesus Saves!" but not "Forty F*ckin' Niners!," he can expect to be sued for religious discrimination under state and federal civil rights laws.
Fair enough, it's not a perfect analogy. However my point still stands that just because a school is a public institution, that doesn't mean they are required to allow you the same latitude you have as if you are in a park or on the street.

[SacTown Chronic]

I assume that the option of respectful silent non-participation is a given. And one that I have chosen from time to time. But why would I pass up the chance to stand in a circle and hold hands with grown men and twelve year-old boys? Why, man, why?

[JWBear]

I go back and forth on this point. For example, what about an office of a government agency and its employees? At a private business, a manager definitely has the right to stop an employee from saying, "Jesus is our savior!" every time someone passes their cubical. If that's done at a government office (let's leave the public out of it, I'm talking about a cube-farm of government employees), is that government infringement of speech? Is that employee's manager an agent of the state censoring her? Or is the manager just someone trying to run an efficient operation? Are government offices barred from enforcing the types of workplace rules that are taken for granted within a private workplace, but would not be kosher for a cop to enforce on a public street, simply because it's a pubic institution?

A school is not an office, but it's close. As long as we're not talking about legal consequences, I don't have a problem with them enforcing certain restrictions on speech and behavior with the goal of creating a workable environment. And for the most part, considering that teachers are not routinely arrested on charges of false imprisonment for making students sit in a room for an hour, we all agree on that.

Yes, this is an edge case, and as I said earlier I don't consider it a major offense. But while the cheerleaders aren't being paid by the school and the message wasn't being produced by the school, the context is a football game that is being paid for by the school, and they are wearing uniforms representing their school. So I do think that sticks one little pinky toe over the line of being a representative of the school.

As someone who has worked in a government office for almost 19 years, I can answer that. It's an area that Management would have to handle very delicately. The employee has a right to express his or her religious beliefs as long as it does not, cause a disruption or become offensive, or be considered proselytization. My take on this particular scenario is that, even without the presence of the public, the employee would be asked to stop as it could easily be construed as proselytization; especially so if the person was in a position of authority. Also, if it made a coworker uncomfortable and could lead a hostile work environment or that coworker to feels that they were being discriminated against, then it would need to be dealt with as a potential EEO issue.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Which is no different than how it would be handled in a private company...and entirely different than it would be handled on a public street.

[lashbear]

Jazzman: OK you got me there :D I'd still like to see a team run through a banner saying "God is a myth" and see what reaction they get. :evil:

[Gemini Cricket]

Religious cheerleaders designated to a certain area now. Most likely near where liberals were sequestered when they wanted to protest Bush.
:D
A public high school in Georgia that recently banned banners containing Bible verses from being displayed at its football games will designate an area roughly 50 yards away from the field for cheerleaders, students and others to erect signs with religious themes, the school's principal said Wednesday.
The decision comes after a group of cheerleaders were told they could no longer display the religious banners — a mainstay at the school for eight years — on the football field at Lakeview-Fort Oglethorpe High School in Fort Oglethorpe, Ga. The ruling caused an uproar in the community.
Source (Yes, it's Faux News - bleh!) (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,558820,00.html)

[Kevy Baby]

Jazzman: OK you got me there :D I'd still like to see a team run through a banner saying "God is a myth" and see what reaction they get. :evil:Especially if the banner was made out of 3/4" plywood

[flippyshark]

Jazzman: OK you got me there :D I'd still like to see a team run through a banner saying "God is a myth" and see what reaction they get. :evil:

In a recent satire, Richard Dawkins wrote a pastiche of P.G. Wodehouse, in which the Bertie Wooster equivalent sees the infamous bus slogan ("There is no God, so just relax and enjoy life" - that one prompted a heated thread here some time ago) and garbles it while trying to repeat it to the Jeeves character:

"There's no bally God, so put a sock in it and have a gargle with the lads"

Truly T-shirt worthy.